§ The result
Tribepad leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
Tribepad finishes 23 points clear of Emi under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 33 — across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Tribepad leads every one of the 7 criteria, Emi none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, Emi 25 to Tribepad 30. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Emi 18, Tribepad 78) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 46% of the weighted advantage Tribepad holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Emi
Emi runs AI agents on WhatsApp, SMS and Messenger that screen and score frontline job applicants against employer-set criteria, schedule interviews, and collect hiring documents and check them against Mexican government databases.
Vendor profile
Tribepad
Tribepad is a UK applicant tracking system whose built-in Sidekick AI assistant scores and ranks applicants against recruiter-weighted skills and generates candidate summaries, SWOT analyses, job descriptions, salary suggestions and interview questions.
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Tribepad under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Emi | Tribepad |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | GB |
| Founded | 2017 | 2008 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Tribepad 78
10.8 weighted points to Tribepad
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Tribepad 56
5.6 weighted points to Tribepad
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Tribepad 54
2.3 weighted points to Tribepad
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Tribepad 56
1.8 weighted points to Tribepad
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Tribepad 58
1.7 weighted points to Tribepad
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Tribepad 58
0.8 weighted points to Tribepad
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Tribepad 30
0.8 weighted points to Tribepad
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -23.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -23 beside that -23.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Tribepad.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Tribepad | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 56 | -28 | -5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 78 | -60 | -10.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 56 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 58 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 54 | -19 | -2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 58 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 56 (F) | -23 | -23.7 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Emi | Tribepad | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Tribepad has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Emi and Tribepad sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 32 for Tribepad, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tribepad last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next